While I agree Cassell progressed as the season went on, I can't but feel he is a product of BB's system. A long term deal, I'd be OK with that. But for the amount of money for such a small body of work is just wrong. Talk about a new regime putting all their eggs in one basket. Wow!
From an outsiders standpoint it's hilarious to watch you guys laugh at the Chiefs for giving a QB money that he hasn't proved he should have.
I get what you're saying but it's a different situation. The Chiefs could have waited for a while because he already has a contract. The Jets were forced to pay fair market value for a 5th overall QB. I don't see why they didn't wait to see what he did before doing this. I suppose maybe they didn't want the pressure of not having a long term deal being something to worry him. It seems like an unnecessary risk to me, but what do I know?
Brady's great college career sure didn't help him get drafted as alot of teams passed on him (pick #199). Cassel was backup to Heisman winner in college and then Brady's understudy for a few years. He had the tools and brains, he just needed a starting gig to prove himself. He got it and now gets a chance to not worry about $$$$ and play football. As long as KC provides him the weapons, he should be fine. Pioli helped BB gather the talent to make the Pats a top team and that should continue with KC.
Compared to Cassel's college career, Brady's was like Tim Tebow. I'm glad some of you on here take things way out of context. I'm comparing Brady to Cassel as this thread is about Cassel . When comparing the two, Brady's college career looks magical compared to Cassel holding the clipboard for many years in LA. This wasn't about how great of a college player Brady was. I'm just showing how little of a resume Cassel has over the last 8 years. He's played one year of real football in that time. Sat on the bench the rest of that time. It remains to be seen how well Cassel will do in KC. His ferrari has been impounded and now he's driving an '85 chevy nova.
He was still highly thought of enough to have been drafted despite never playing. That's how good he was in high school, and that's how obvious it was that he still had great physical tools. He almost (in hindsight probably should have) started over a Heisman winner. Brady's college career was enough to draft him a whopping 31 picks ahead of Cassel. And it's not like just because you've only see him on Sundays for one season that there's 16 games and nothing else to go off of in evaluating what he's worth. He practiced every day. They have film of that too, you realize. Pioli drafted the guy and watched him develop for 4 years before blossoming. We don't know a lot about him, but there arepeople who have a very good track record at evaluating football talent, who do. I'm guessing that '08 only confirmed for a certain someone in the Pats organization (who coincidentally, signed him to this deal) what was long suspected from seeing the guy every day.
That's the problem with the system, you have to look at it relatively to see it as being good, because if you look at it objectively, that much money for any rookie is completely ludicrous. The system is flawed and you have come to accept it. I don't want to accept it.
I'll clarify for you. He was drafted because he went to QB U. Plain and simple. If he went anywhere besides USC he wouldn't have been drafted. Secondly, if Pro scouting departments were basing their selections on what a kid did against HS competition then that scout would be out of a job tomorrow. I do some football scouting at the HS and college level and have seen this happen in one very bizarre instance before. This isn't baseball, this is football. The reason scouts don't evaluate HS tape in football when judging whether or not the kid can play in the pros is because of physical development. They need to see what a kid does from 18-22 which are the most formative years for a football player's body. A lot of times in HS half the kids on the field have barely gone through puberty. Very easy for a star player to standout in HS, not the case when everyone is on scholarship in college. It's the most physically taxing pro sport and scouts judge you based on how you do against the best physical specimens in college. They can use his HS success as a barometer for what type of athlete he is however when it comes down to drafting him they're looking strictly at his college body of work. Cassel has no body of work. Yet he had Pete Carroll and USC which NFL scouts greatly admire and respect. That's why Cassel got drafted. NFL Scouts don't pull out his game tapes from Chatsworth HS when evaluating whether he's got what it takes to make it in the NFL You do realize that Brady was a phenom also and was drafted in the MLB as well. It's not uncommon at all for a stud Qb coming out of HS to have this same profile. However you don't see former stud HS QB's getting drafted at QB because they lit it up at DeLaSalle or Don Bosco while in HS. Do you know how many top rated 5 star HS QB's have flopped in college? The list is too long and sordid for me to go through it. Most never get a shot to play for a pro team let alone get drafted by one because they were outstanding in HS. The point is that noone in the world, you and me included, would have predicted Cassel to have the type of success he had last year.
If he didn't go to SC he may well have been a starter for 3 years at a big time program and been drafted in the top 10 picks. Total speculation.
So is this. Let's give him a half season (minimum) in KC before we proclaim him to be the real deal or not.
To me this is the heart of the matter. It's a different team, different set of circumstances and pressure now being The Man, that he didn't even deal with in college. I'm not totally discounting him, but we'll see how he does. Any flaws will be exposed a lot more now than they were playing for that machine in New England.
Yep, I'm not discounting him at all either. I'm merely pointing out that he's not this QB anomaly that some try to purport him to be. We shall see shortly.
I think the contract made sense. He's getting a little more guaranteed than we gave Gholston last year. It's a risk but not a bad risk for a guy they believe in to lead their team. Look what we gave Sanchez. I hope Sanchez turns into a great QB and he may but I suspect next year Cassel will be miles better than him.
As he said though, we didn't have much of a choice because of where we drafted Sanchez. They had the option to wait and see, since Cassel had a contract. At least if he does turn out to be good he's in KC and not with the Pats.
I'm not claiming that anybody in the NFL was watching his HS tapes when scouting him. I'm saying the fact that he was a blue chip prospect in High School, and practiced well enough to loose in a toss-up competition to an eventual heisman winner, DID. Who are the other USC career backups who got drafted? That's an honest question. You also completely ignored my larger point, that Pioli, the guy who signed him to the deal in question, probably wasn't surprised that Cassel had his success last year. He drafted him, watched him practice every day and was constantly evaluating him with BB for 4 years.There's a reason he wasn't cut despite almost never playing and shitting the bed in the few times he appeared in '07. He obviously came off as impressive in meetings and practices for several years before signing this deal. Do you think the Packers didn't know enough about Aaron Rodgers to sign him to the 6 year/ 65 mill deal he got?
What option did they have? They know that Denver wants him. What if Cassel doesn't sign once the season starts?
That's fair. Maybe I'm underestimating the Pioli angle. I understand the Rodgers comparison but again, Rodgers had a very good college career at Cal. I've seen a lot of guys get big NFL contracts off stellar college careers. Yes, your comparison does fit in terms of both coming off the bench without any real NFL experience. And yes, it fits in terms of them both having big years last year after being relative unknowns. However again, Rodgers was acclaimed at Cal and a first round pick. I understand he sat on the bench his first few years just like Cassel, and was behind a future HOF'er, just like Cassel. Yet if I had a choice of those two today, I would sign Rodgers based not only on last year but also on how well he played at Cal, including beating a juggernaut USC team in 2003 and almost beating them again in 2004. I believe Cassel was on the bench for both of those games.
